linux-kernel - Re: [rfc] balance-on-fork NUMA placement

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708021801010.13312@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date:	Thu, 2 Aug 2007 18:02:56 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
cc:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [rfc] balance-on-fork NUMA placement

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:

> > Ok. So MPOL_BIND on a single node. We would have to save the current 
> > memory policy on the stack and then restore it later. Then you would need 
> > a special call anyways.
> 
> Well the memory policy will already be set to MPOL_BIND at this point.
> The slab allocator I think would just have to honour the node at the
> object level.

Who set the policy? The parent process may have its own memory policy. If 
you set that then the earlier policy is lost.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/